Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

image.png

 

As Florida deals with the aftermath of Hurricane Milton, Governor Ron DeSantis is facing growing pressure from environmental activists and scientists who claim climate change is fueling stronger hurricanes. However, DeSantis has pushed back against these claims, stating during a media briefing in Port St. Lucie that hurricanes are a historical part of Florida's weather pattern, especially during hurricane season. "There is precedent for all this in history," he said. "It is hurricane season. You are going to have tropical weather."

 

Scientists have repeatedly stated that the warming planet, caused by fossil fuel emissions, is directly linked to rising ocean temperatures, which in turn strengthens hurricanes. Jeff Chanton, a professor of environmental science and oceanography at Florida State University, pointed out that the connection between warmer waters and more intense hurricanes is well-documented in scientific literature. "He is assuming that this is all cyclical, whereas many scientists believe there is a trend towards stronger hurricanes and increased intensification,"

 

Chanton remarked, referencing five scientific papers that support his view. Despite DeSantis's statements, Chanton is unsure where the governor is sourcing his historical hurricane data. When asked for further information, the governor’s office did not provide the requested details.

 

Hurricane Milton, which hit Siesta Key as a Category 3 storm, has reignited debates over climate change, particularly as it comes just two weeks after Hurricane Helene struck northern Florida. Environmentalists are seizing the moment to bring climate change to the forefront of political discussions, especially with the upcoming elections. Some are calling for candidates to take more decisive action on the issue.

 

DeSantis, however, has long been skeptical of climate change. Earlier this year, he signed legislation removing climate goals from Florida’s state statutes. He remains firm in his belief that the current storms are part of a natural weather cycle, emphasizing, "There is nothing new under the sun."

 

The debate has even extended to the Florida Senate race between Republican Senator Rick Scott and Democrat Debbie Mucarsel-Powell. Scott acknowledged in a recent CNN interview that "the climate is clearly changing," though his past comments suggest skepticism about the left’s approach to climate policy. His spokesperson, Chris Hartline, pointed out that Scott's stance has remained consistent, referencing a 2019 op-ed in which Scott described climate change as “real and requiring real solutions,” but criticized the left for making it "a religion."

 

In the broader political landscape, Vice President Kamala Harris has also criticized former President Donald Trump for spreading misinformation about the recent storms. Trump has blamed the federal response to Hurricane Milton as a failure, despite some members of his own party disputing his claims.

 

Hurricane Milton developed quickly off the coast of Mexico’s Yucatán Peninsula, becoming a Category 5 storm before weakening upon its Florida landfall. DeSantis cited the 1930s Labor Day hurricane, stating it was "head and shoulders above any powerful hurricane we’ve had in the state of Florida." He urged people to consider the historical context of hurricanes rather than view each storm as evidence of climate change.

 

As the governor dismissed claims that the government could control the weather, joking that he would opt for “78 and sunny year round” if he had such power, Chanton offered a different perspective. "As the oceans become warmer, we can expect that hurricanes will respond to distribute that heat," he explained. “And one of their responses is to be stronger.”

The clash between those focused on long-term climate trends and leaders like DeSantis who prioritize historical weather patterns is likely to continue as hurricanes increase in intensity and political divisions over climate change grow sharper.

 

Based on a report from Politico 2024-10-12

 

news-logo-btm.jpg

 

news-footer-4.png

 

image.png

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

I like data, called me old fashioned. :coffee1:

 

1933 was a bad year - oh wait, nearly a century ago.😇

 

 

hurricane 1.png

hurricane 2.png

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

I understand it just fine.  I just don't agree.  More accurately, I'm not convinced.   Not enough that I'm willing to pay more than I need to eat, stay warm, get around and download stuff.

 

On an aside, I'm with the folks that think the past 100 years may be a recovery from the volcanic winter from Krakatoa.  There are historic precedents.  Not to mention, all that plant food in the atmosphere isn't all bad.

 

What's that got to do with your ridiculous assumption that change is going to be drastically over a few years?

As for the Krakatoa thesis, what lunatic source did that come from?

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Some else who doesn't understand the crucial difference between change and rate of change.

And the fact we have 8.2 billion humans living on the planet now, 40% of which live in coastal regions.

  • Like 2
Posted
19 minutes ago, placeholder said:

What's that got to do with your ridiculous assumption that change is going to be drastically over a few years?

 

Here's a thought.  Why don't you post a link to where I said that? 

 

And just respond to what I say, and not what you wish I said.

 

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
38 minutes ago, MalcolmB said:

Sailing ships did the trick before.

they can do it again.

Are you willing to give up air travel for passage on a sailing ship.

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

No one disputes that natural forces have caused climate change in the past. However, the current warming is caused by manmade pollution.

 

If you disagree, please list the changes in natural forces that are causing the current warming. For example, if you stupidly write "the sun", provide evidence of increased solar radiation.

 

Bye!

It's funny. Scientists have detected a weak positive correlation between a logwarming and solar activity. But the thing is, for the past several solar cycles, solar activity has actually been very subdued. Just during this last cycle has it picked up. And as I pointed out, the effect would still be weak.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, placeholder said:
2 hours ago, impulse said:

Here's a thought.  Why don't you post a link to where I said that? 

 

And just respond to what I say, and not what you wish I said.

It's obvously implicit in what you wrote.  For instance "ban combustible engines". What authorities have proposed banning combustion engines in the short run? Or "no more ships transporting goods around the world."  Over time, these modes of transportation can be replaced. But to state it baldly without qualifications as you do is just ridiculous.

 

You're either responding to someone else's posts, or you're yelling at a cloud going by.  Either way, I did not mention combustion engines or ships in this thread.

 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Topics

  • Latest posts...

    1. 34

      Breaker box look correct?

    2. 133

      Poster of the Year 2024

    3. 133

      Poster of the Year 2024

    4. 14

      Thailand Announces New Minimum Wage Increase for 2025

    5. 133

      Poster of the Year 2024

    6. 21

      Progressive Lens Prescription

  • Popular in The Pub


×
×
  • Create New...